Human–Wildlife Interactions 4(2):232–246, Fall 2010
Late summer movements by giant Canada
geese in relation to a September hunting
season
CHARLES D. DIETER, Department of Biology-Microbiology, South Dakota State University, Box
2207B, Brookings, SD 57007, USA [email protected]
BOBBY J. ANDERSON, Department of Biology, Valley City State University, Valley City, ND 58072,
USA
JEFFREY S. GLEASON, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Kulm Wetland Management District, Kulm,
ND 58456, USA
PAUL W. MAMMENGA, South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks, Aberdeen, SD
57401, USA
SPENCER VAA, South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks, Brookings, SD 57007, USA
Abstract: The population of giant Canada geese (Branta canadensis maxima) breeding
in eastern South Dakota has increased dramatically since reintroduction efforts began in
the 1960s. May breeding population levels of giant Canada geese exceeded population
management goals set by the South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks (SDGFP)
by the mid-1990s, and the population has continued to increase into the 2000s. This population
increase was accompanied by an increase in goose-related conflicts such as crop depredation.
In 1996, a September hunting season was implemented in select counties in eastern South
Dakota in an effort to reduce the giant Canada goose population. After its implementation,
some hunters and biologists were concerned that the early September season was causing
Canada geese to disperse from areas open to hunting due to hunting pressure. Herein, we
describe post-molt movements by geese, particularly in relation to the September hunting
season. We caught Canada geese in 7 counties in eastern South Dakota during the summer
molting period, 2000 to 2003. We attached VHF (n = 153) and satellite transmitters (n = 43)
on adult female geese with broods. We monitored movements of marked geese weekly from
July through the fall freezing period. For this study, we considered major movements any postmolt movement ≥40 km from the wetland in which the goose was banded prior to October 15.
Forty-six percent of marked geese made major movements from July to September, and 43%
moved during the first week of the September season, indicating that the season may have
triggered their post-molt movement. Major movements were primarily in a northerly direction,
and the longest documented post-molt movement was 474 km north. It appears that the onset
of the September hunting season may have caused geese to move immediately before or
during the first 10 days of the season. Post-molt movements prior to the September hunting
season may simply have been a function of established, learned traditions, but the punctuated
movement of geese during the opening weekend of the hunting season may have resulted
from geese responding to the hunting season itself.
Key words: Canada geese, human–wildlife conflicts, hunting, post-molt movements, radio
telemetry, resident geese, satellite transmitters, September hunting season
P+9&,1)3+(6
+4
.31()
'#63-#()
Canada
geese
(Branta
canadensis
maxima)
have
increased
dramatically
(i.e.,
12%
per
year
from
1966
to
1999;
Gabig
2000)
in
eastern
South
Dakota
since
reintroduction
efforts
began,
and
the
population
appears
to
be
highly
productive
(Dieter
and
Anderson
2009a).
The
population
objective
for
South
Dakota,
based
on
aerial
surveys
conducted
in
May
by
the
U.S.
Fish
and
Wildlife
Service
(Smith
1995),
was
80,000
to
90,000
geese.
But,
since
1998,
the
population
estimate
has
averaged
126,200
(1998
to
2009;
Vaa
et
al.
2010).
The
population
increase
has
been
accompanied
by
an
increase
in
goose‑related
problems,
primarily
crop
depredation
by
geese
during
the
brood‑rearing
and
molting
period
(Flann
1999,
Schaible
et
al.
2005).
From
2000
to
2009,
the
South
Dakota
Department
of
Game,
Fish
and
Parks
(SDGFP)
annually
spent
>$325,000
on
Canada
goose
damage
management
activities
in
>20
counties
in
the
state
(Vaa
et
al.
2010).
A
September
goose
hunting
season
was
implemented
in
1996
for
10
counties
(expanded
to
56
counties
in
2007)
in
eastern
South
Dakota,
largely
under
the
presumption
that
increased
hunting
pressure
would
increase
overall
harvest
of
Canada
geese,
thereby
alleviating
depredation
complaints
(Gabig
2000,
Sheaffer
et
al.
2005,
Vaa
et
al.
2010).
The
early
September
season
(1996
to
2008)
resulted
in
an
average
Goose movements • Dieter et al.
233
annual
harvest
of
~28,000
Canada
geese,
ranging
from
a
low
of
11,281
geese
during
1997
to
a
high
of
51,491
geese
in
2001
(Vaa
et
al.
2010).
Even
though
hunter
numbers
have
declined
during
the
early
September
season
in
recent
years,
an
increasing
proportion
(annual
0
=
22.58
+
SE
=
2.00%)
of
the
total
annual
Canada
goose
harvest
is
comprised
of
geese
shot
during
the
early
September
season
(SDGFP,
unpublished
data).
Several
years
aHer
the
September
season
was
initiated,
there
was
a
growing
concern
that
the
early
hunting
season
was
causing
geese
to
disperse
from
areas
open
to
hunting
to
areas
closed
to
hunting
Figure 1. Counties and capture sites (as stars) in eastern South
within
the
state
or
to
other
states
Dakota where Canada geese were captured and fitted with neck(Dieter
and
Anderson
2009b).
It
collars with VHF transmitters or PTTs, 2000–2003.
appeared
that
many
geese
were
making
considerable
post‑molt
movements
not
been
any
previous
research
regarding
post‑
early
in
the
autumn,
possibly
in
response
to
molt
movements
of
Canada
geese
in
eastern
the
September
hunting
season
(Anderson
and
South
Dakota.
Effective
management
of
eastern
South
Dieter
2009,
Dieter
and
Anderson
2009b).
The
extent
of
post‑molt
movement
paeerns
Dakota’s
resident
goose
population
requires
an
of
Canada
geese
and
their
response
to
hunting
understanding
of
the
extent
of
subpopulation
have
not
been
studied
in
many
locations
(but
structure
and
post‑molt
movements.
The
see
Mykut
et
al.
2004,
Luukkonen
et
al.
2008).
primary
objective
of
this
study
was
to
document
Most
studies
of
Canada
geese
have
involved
the
extent
of
post‑molt
movements
made
prior
documenting
local
movements
of
migrant
to
fall
freezing
period
by
adult
female
Canada
geese
and
their
subflocking
behavior
around
geese
(and
their
broods).
We
wanted
to
describe
specific
refuge
areas
(Kennedy
and
Arthur
post‑molt
goose
movements
and
chronology,
1974,
Koerner
et
al.
1974,
Zicus
1981,
Anderson
particularly
in
relation
to
the
early
September
and
Joyner
1985,
Schultz
et
al.
1988).
These
hunting
season.
subflocks
exhibited
discrete
movement
paeerns
and
differential
harvest
rates
among
subflocks
Study area
(Koerner
et
al.
1974,
Zicus
1981,
Schultz
et
al.
We
captured
Canada
geese
in
Brookings,
1988,
Powell
et
al.
2004).
For
example,
Raveling
Clark,
Codington,
Day,
Hamlin,
Kingsbury,
and
(1978)
found
that
geese
banded
in
Manitoba
Lake
counties
in
eastern
South
Dakota
(Figure
and
migrated
through
Rochester,
Minnesota,
1).
Waterfowl
habitats
within
the
Central
sustained
much
higher
harvest
rates
than
those
Flyway,
of
which
South
Dakota
is
a
member,
migrating
farther
west.
Using
band‑recovery
are
described
in
detail
by
Brewster
et
al.
(1976)
data
only,
Powell
et
al.
(2004)
documented
and
Bae
et
al.
(1989).
The
7
counties
where
we
subpopulations
of
Canada
geese
in
Nebraska
captured
geese
were
within
the
Coteau
des
that
differed
with
respect
to
movements
Prairies
(hereaHer,
Coteau),
a
glaciated
region
and
survival
(but
see
Groepper
et
al.
2008).
between
the
James
River
Lowland
to
the
west
However,
none
of
these
studies
documented
and
the
Minnesota
River‑Red
River
Lowland
to
the
full
extent
of
post‑molt
movements
of
the
east
(Gab
1979,
Hogan
and
Fouberg
1998,
Canada
geese.
Other
than
leg‑band
recoveries
South
Dakota
Department
of
Game,
Fish,
and
(Gleason
1997,
Gleason
et
al.
2003),
there
has
Parks
2005).
Elevation
ranged
from
518
m
in
Human–Wildlife Interactions 4(2)
234
the
southeast
to
>610
m
above
sea
level
in
the
northeast
(Hogan
and
Fouberg
1998).
The
elevation
of
the
James
River
Lowland
ranged
from
396
m
to
426
m,
and
the
Minnesota
River‑
Red
River
Lowland
to
the
east
has
as
elevation
about
244
m
lower
than
the
Coteau
(Hogan
and
Fouberg
1998).
The
large
number
and
diversity
of
wetlands
in
the
Coteau
are
used
extensively
by
breeding
and
staging
waterfowl
(Brewster
et
al.
1976,
Bae
et
al.
1989,
Naugle
et
al.
2001,
U.S.
Fish
and
Wildlife
Service
2009).
The
eastern
edge
of
the
study
area
lies
within
the
tall‑grass
prairie
gradually
giving
way
to
the
northern
mixed‑grass
prairie
to
the
west
(Samson
et
al.
1998).
However,
because
of
the
rather
gentle
topography
and
increasing
interest
in
row‑crop
agriculture,
much
of
the
study
area
has
been
converted
to
crops
(Higgins
et
al.
2002).
The
major
agricultural
crops
within
the
study
area
include
corn
(Zea
mays),
soybeans
(Glycine
max),
wheat
(Triticum
aestivum),
barley
(Hordeum
vulgare),
alfalfa
(Medicago
sativa),
and
prairie‑wetland
hay.
Livestock
production
also
is
an
important
part
of
the
agricultural
economy.
A
more
detailed
description
of
the
habitat
types,
vegetation,
soils,
climate,
and
topography
of
the
study
area
is
available
at
SDGFP
(2005).
Trapping
Methods
We
captured
Canada
geese
(i.e.,
molting
adults,
subadults,
and
goslings)
during
their
summer
flightless
period
(June
23
to
July
11)
from
2000
to
2003.
Prior
to
capturing
geese,
we
visited
sites
to
ascertain
flock
size
and
composition.
We
selected
capture
sites
with
brood
flocks
because
nesting
females
were
our
population
of
interest
for
marking
(Anderson
2006).
We
captured
geese
by
driving
them
into
corral‑type
traps
(Cooch
1953)
placed
in
shallow
bays
with
gradually
sloping
shorelines.
All
trapped
geese
were
banded
with
standard
USFWS
aluminum
leg
bands,
unless
the
geese
previously
had
been
banded.
We
used
plumage
characteristics
and
cloacal
examinations
to
determine
age
and
sex
of
geese
(Hanson
1962,
Hanson
1997).
Adults
and
goslings
were
aged
and
classified
as
“aHer
hatch
year”
(AHY)
and
“hatch
year”
(HY),
respectively.
We
recorded
band
numbers
of
recaptured
geese,
and
then
released
the
geese.
We
reported
recaptured
geese
to
the
USFWS
Bird
Banding
Laboratory
(BBL).
Although
we
aeempted
to
select
only
wetlands
with
concentrations
of
brood
flocks,
there
was
the
potential
of
aeaching
transmieers
to
molt
migrant
females
from
other
areas
because
unsuccessful
females
sometimes
molt
migrate
(Sterling
and
Dzubin
1967,
Lawrence
et
al.
1998,
Abraham
et
al.
1999,
Dieter
and
Anderson
2009b),
and
molt
migrants
from
several
states
were
known
to
use
wetlands
in
eastern
South
Dakota
(Gleason
1997,
Gleason
et
al.
2003).
In
some
years,
an
estimated
35%
of
recaptured
geese
during
banding
were
molt‑
migrants
from
other
states
(SDGFP
unpublished
data).
However,
we
selected
only
adult
breeding
females,
as
evidenced
by
a
brood
patch
to
mark
with
transmieers
(Hanson
1959),
so
we
believe
most
geese
were
local
breeders.
During
2000
and
2001,
we
aeached
only
very
high
frequency
(VHF)
transmieers,
but
during
2002
and
2003,
we
aeached
both
platform
transmieing
terminals
(PTT),
satellite
transmieers,
and
VHF
transmieers.
At
each
capture
site,
we
aeached
transmieers
to
5
to
10
female
geese.
We
used
a
combination
of
VHF
and
PTT
telemetry
to
document
post‑molt
movements.
Conventional
VHF
telemetry
has
been
used
extensively
to
study
breeding
ecology
and
movements
of
various
species
of
waterfowl
including
Canada
geese
for
>40
years
(Cochran
et
al.
1963,
Schultz
et
al.
1988,
Mykut
et
al.
2004,
Hupp
et
al.
2006).
Recent
advancements
in
technology
has
led
to
reductions
in
both
the
size
and
weight
of
PTTs,
making
them
more
appropriate
for
monitoring
movements
of
waterfowl
species,
including
pink‑footed
geese
(Anser
brachyrhynchus;
Glahder
et
al.
2006),
Greenland
white‑fronted
geese
(Anser
albifrons
flavirostris;
Fox
et
al.
2003),
lesser
white‑fronted
geese
(Anser
erythropus;
Lorentsen
et
al.
1998,
Aarvak
and
Oien
2003),
emperor
geese
(Chen
canagica;
Hupp
et
al.
2007,
Hupp
et
al.
2008),
greater
snow
geese
(Chen
caerulescens
atlantica;
Blouin
et
al.
1999),
Canada
geese
(Malecki
et
al.
2001,
Mykut
et
al.
2004),
and
even
the
small‑bodied
Atlantic
brant
(Branta
bernicla
hrota;
Gudmundsson
et
al.
1995).
Several
authors
have
cautioned
researchers
interested
in
estimating
survival
of
geese
marked
with
neck
collars
or
transmieers
(Samuel
et
al.
1990,
Castelli
and
Trost
1996,
Schmutz
and
Morse
2000,
Alisauskas
and
Lindberg
2002).
Due
to
the
short
duration
of
our
study
(~4
months),
Goose movements • Dieter et al.
235
we
assumed
100%
retention
of
neck‑
collars
(see
Coluccy
et
al.
2002)
and
that
marker
effects
were
negligible.
Telemetry
equipment
VHF
transmieers
were
manu‑
factured
by
Advanced
Telemetry
Systems
(Model
3630,
57
g;
Isanti,
Minn.)
and
were
aeached
to
black
neck
collars
(made
by
P.
Mammenga,
SDGFP)
from
2000
to
2002.
During
2003,
black
neck
collars
were
made
from
Rowmark®
plastic
(7
cm
x
16.5
cm;
Spinner
Plastics,
Springfield,
Ill.).
VHF
transmieers
were
designed
with
an
antenna
(21
cm)
that
protruded
from
the
top‑rear
of
the
collar
at
a
45°
angle
and
ran
down
the
bird’s
back.
VHF
collars
had
a
pulse
rate
of
50
ppm,
a
pulse
width
of
20
ms,
and
a
guaranteed
baeery
life
of
300
days.
All
VHF
transmieers
had
frequencies
within
the
150
and
151
MHz
range,
transmieed
continuously,
and
did
not
have
mortality
censors.
Based
on
field
Figure 2. Boundaries of aerial search areas used to locate necktesting
before
and
aHer
deployment,
collared Canada geese with VHF transmitters in eastern South
VHF
units
had
an
effective
ground
Dakota, 2000 to 2003. The primary area was flown weekly; the
extended area was flown every 2 to 3 weeks, and the outer area
and
aerial
range
of
approximately
was flown 2 to 3 times per year.
3.2
and
32
km,
respectively.
We
aeached
satellite
transmieers
(Model
weight
of
collar)
exceeded
the
3%
of
the
body
ST‑19,
74
g;
Telonics
Inc.,
Mesa,
Ariz.)
to
black
mass
threshold
recommended
by
Advanced
neck
collars
made
from
Rowmark
plastic
Telemetry
Systems
(see
review
by
Barron
et
al.
(Spinner
Plastics,
Springfield,
Ill.)
during
2002
2010).
We
used
black
plastic
collars
in
an
effort
and
2003.
The
PTT
design
for
2002
was
similar
to
the
redesigned
PTT
used
by
Mykut
(2002).
to
prevent
hunters
from
selectively
shooting
Satellite
transmieers
had
a
specified
baeery
life
collared
geese
out
of
flocks
(Samuel
et
al.
1990,
of
approximately
360
hours
that
was
separated
Castelli
and
Trost
1996).
Both
PTTs
and
VHF
over
4
distinct
monitoring
periods
(duty
cycles).
transmieers
had
labels
on
them
that
included
During
2002,
PTTs
had
a
4‑hour
transmission
an
address
and
phone
number
to
contact
if
on
window
and
then
would
shut
off,
which
someone
harvested
a
collared
goose.
During
allowed
the
transmieer
to
operate
a
total
of
2002,
we
affixed
reward
labels
for
$100
to
PTTs
60
times
during
the
365‑day
period
(D.
Crow,
to
increase
the
probability
of
reporting
marked
Telonics
Inc.,
personal
communication).
There
geese
harvested
or
found
dead.
No
reward
were
problems
with
data
quality
used
during
labels
were
affixed
to
other
transmieers
during
2002.
Telonics
Inc.
redesigned
transmieers
for
this
study.
2003,
and
the
“on”
period
was
extended
to
8
hours,
allowing
the
transmieer
to
transmit
45
VHF
monitoring
days
during
the
365‑day
period.
The
transmieer
We
monitored
VHF‑marked
geese
weekly
into
duty
cycles
in
2003
maximized
data
collected
November
and
early
December
when
inclement
with
the
limited
baeery
life.
Neither
the
VHF
weather
caused
geese
to
migrate
south
of
South
(1.45%)
nor
PTT
(1.80%)
packages
(including
Dakota.
From
July
to
early
August,
we
used
a
236
4‑element,
null‑peak
antenna
system
mounted
on
top
of
a
4‑wheel‑drive
pickup
to
monitor
geese.
We
used
ground
telemetry
to
search
for
geese
within
approximately
a
13‑km
radius
of
the
previous
week’s
location.
We
determined
goose
locations
visually
or
from
triangulation
during
ground
telemetry.
We
marked
locations
on
detailed
maps
made
in
ArcView
GIS,
Version
3.2,
soHware
(Environmental
Systems
Research
Institute,
Redlands,
Calif.)
with
themes
of
wetlands,
streams,
and
roads.
We
used
a
Garmin®
Rhino
120
GPS
to
record
the
Universal
Transverse
Mercator
coordinates.
We
recorded
the
date,
time,
flock
size,
and
general
habitat
of
the
location
each
time
we
located
a
VHF‑marked
goose.
AHer
mid‑August,
we
were
oHen
unable
to
locate
marked
geese,
so
we
used
aerial
surveillance
to
find
them.
The
area
where
geese
were
monitored
encompassed
only
counties
east
of
the
Missouri
River
in
South
Dakota,
southeastern
North
Dakota
east
of
Highway
281
and
south
of
I‑94,
and
45
km
into
western
Minnesota
from
the
northern
South
Dakota
border
south
to
I‑90
(Figure
2).
In
addition,
we
collected
satellite
telemetry
and
band‑recovery
data
from
areas
within
the
Central
and
Mississippi
flyways
from
as
far
north
as
Nunavut,
Canada,
to
as
far
south
as
Oklahoma
(Anderson
and
Dieter
2009,
Dieter
and
Anderson
2009b).
The
first
few
days
of
each
week
consisted
of
ground‑based
telemetry,
with
aerial
surveillance
conducted
later
during
the
week
to
locate
geese.
For
aerial
telemetry,
we
used
a
directional,
4‑element
yagi
antenna
mounted
on
each
wing
strut
of
a
Cessna
172
fixed‑wing
aircraH
(Gilmer
et
al.
1981).
The
plane
was
flown
at
an
elevation
of
1,372
to
2,286
m
above
mean
sea
level,
depending
on
weather
and
ceiling
conditions.
We
flew
at
a
target
elevation
of
~1,829
m
under
ideal
conditions.
Aerial
surveillance
was
designed
to
cover
as
much
area
as
possible
based
on
the
effective
ranges
of
the
VHF
transmieers.
The
receiver
scanned
through
all
frequencies,
cycling
from
1
frequency
to
the
next
every
4
seconds.
Aerial
searches
for
individual
geese
would
start
at
the
last
known
location.
If
the
goose
was
not
located,
we
flew
north‑south
transects
32
km
apart
to
locate
the
goose.
We
recorded
goose
locations
on
detailed
maps
created
with
ArcView
3.2
GIS
soHware
Human–Wildlife Interactions 4(2)
and
UTM
coordinates
were
taken
if
there
was
any
question
about
the
location.
We
flew
the
primary
search
area
almost
weekly,
the
extended
search
area
roughly
every
third
week,
and
the
outer
search
area
only
2
or
3
times
each
fall.
We
flew
4
to15
hours
each
week
between
late
August
and
early
November,
for
an
annual
total
of
60
to
120
hours
of
flight
time.
The
greatest
amount
of
flying
time
occurred
between
late
August
and
mid‑October.
PTT monitoring
Locations
of
PTT‑marked
geese
were
received
by
Service
Argos
Inc.
(Largo,
Md.),
through
their
Argos
System
(ARGOS),
a
satellite‑
based
location
and
data
collection
system.
PTT
location
data
were
sent
to
us
through
Service
Argos’
Automated
Distribution
Service.
ARGOS
provides
2
location
estimates
per
PTT
during
each
satellite
overpass
and
designates
the
location
with
the
best
frequency
continuity
as
the
best
location
(“location
1”).
We
termed
the
alternate
location
“location
2”.
We
determined
on
several
occasions
that
location
2
was
the
best
one,
based
on
flight
capabilities
of
Canada
geese.
We
used
a
sorting
routine
to
evaluate
the
location
pairs
and
remove
the
biologically
implausible
location
(Brieen
et
al.
1999,
Malecki
et
al.
2001).
ARGOS
assigns
each
location
a
location
class
(LC)
based
on
its
accuracy
estimates.
We
used
only
LCs
that
were
appropriate
for
accurately
indentifying
goose
locations
(Brothers
et
al.
1998,
Brieen
et
al.
1999).
Data analysis
We
imported
all
location
information
for
both
VHF
and
PTT
transmieers
into
ArcView®
3.2
GIS
soHware
to
document
and
map
movements
and
distances
traveled
between
consecutive
locations.
We
measured
distances
that
geese
moved
from
banding
sites
and
placed
them
in
3
distance
bins:
(1)
<40
km;
(2)
40
to
100
km;
and
(3)
>100
km.
We
considered
any
movement
>40
km
to
be
a
major
movement
because
a
movement
of
this
distance
would
allow
a
marked
goose
to
emigrate
to
an
adjacent
county
potentially
outside
the
hunting
zone.
We
recorded
the
date,
distance,
and
direction
of
major
movements.
The
distance
reported
for
each
individual
goose
was
the
maximum
that
was
documented
for
a
goose
away
from
its
capture
site
during
the
Goose movements • Dieter et al.
first
autumn
following
capture.
We
calculated
the
maximum
distances
in
ArcView
3.2
GIS
soHware
by
measuring
the
distance
from
an
individual’s
farthest
location
from
its
capture
site
prior
to
the
fall
freezing
period.
We
assumed
that
aerial
telemetry
would
result
in
a
100%
detection
probability
for
VHF‑marked
geese
within
the
area
searched.
If
a
VHF‑marked
goose
was
not
located
by
aerial
telemetry
within
the
search
areas,
we
assumed
the
goose
had
moved
outside
the
search
area
because
only
3
VHF
transmieers
were
confirmed
malfunctions
during
the
study
(Anderson
2006).
We
assigned
geese
that
moved
out
of
the
aerial
search
areas
a
maximum
distance
reading
of
>100
km
for
analysis
purposes.
Aerial
search
areas
oHen
extended
well
beyond
100
km
distance
from
specific
capture
sites,
and
many
geese
that
flew
outside
the
search
areas
likely
moved
much
farther
than
100
km.
A
Chi‑square
test
was
used
to
compare
by
year
the
number
of
geese
that
made
post‑molt
movements.
We
defined
the
departure
date
as
the
date
a
marked
goose
made
a
major
movement
from
its
capture
site.
We
defined
the
return
date
as
the
date
a
marked
goose
returned
to
its
capture
area.
We
created
maps
of
goose
movements
using
ArcView
3.2
GIS
soHware
for
each
county
where
geese
were
captured
during
each
year.
Many
VHF
transmieers
were
operational
for
2
autumns
aHer
aeachment
to
a
goose,
allowing
comparisons
of
yearly
post‑molt
movements
by
individual
geese.
We
compared
second
year
movements
of
VHF‑marked
geese
in
2000
to
2002
with
the
individual’s
prior
year’s
movements
to
determine
differences.
We
did
not
include
VHF‑marked
geese
from
2003
in
this
analysis
because
all
monitoring
of
transmieers
ended
June
30,
2004.
PTT
transmieers
provided
functioning
signals
only
for
<1
year
and,
thus,
could
not
be
used
to
determine
movements
in
the
second
year.
We
defined
a
goose
that
made
major
movements
that
varied
between
years
as
exhibiting
different
movements.
We
considered
second
year
movements
different
if
geese
made
a
major
movement
during
1
year
but
not
during
the
other
year.
Results
237
During
2000
and
2001,
we
fieed
100
adult
female
geese
with
VHF
transmieers.
In
2002
and
2003,
we
fieed
53
geese
with
VHF
transmieers
and
43
geese
with
PTTs.
We
could
not
use
all
196
marked
geese
for
analysis
of
movements
because
11
geese
were
excluded
due
to
injury,
death,
or
transmieer
failure.
In
addition,
we
applied
leg‑bands
to
3,839
geese
in
the
study
area
over
the
4
summers.
VHF
transmieers
performed
well
during
all
4
years,
with
only
3
transmieers
suspected
of
malfunctioning
prior
to
geese
making
their
first
migration
south.
There
was
no
other
evidence
of
transmieers
malfunctioning
throughout
the
first
autumn
aHer
deployment,
and
no
geese
with
nonfunctioning
transmieers
were
harvested
and
reported
by
hunters.
We
did
not
observe
any
geese
with
a
nonfunctioning
VHF
transmieer
when
geese
returned
the
first
spring
post‑capture.
In
fact,
12
of
17
geese
that
made
major
movements
to
unknown
areas
in
October
returned
to
their
capture
areas
the
following
spring
with
functioning
transmieers.
Most
VHF
transmieers
continued
working
throughout
the
second
autumn
and
even
into
the
second
spring
when
geese
returned
to
their
nesting
grounds.
Average
PTT
longevity
was
7.4
±
1.13
(SE)
and
7.7
±
0.58
months
for
2002
and
2003,
respectively.
One
PTT
transmieed
only
3
location
estimates
before
failing
on
September
20,
2002.
This
bird
was
excluded
from
movement
analysis.
The
number
of
functioning
PTTs
declined
with
time,
and
many
were
not
operational
during
2002
and
2003.
During
2002
and
2003,
4
geese
with
PTTs
were
shot
each
autumn
by
hunters.
We
did
not
use
these
birds
to
plot
PTT
longevity.
During
autumn
2002,
PTTs
began
to
malfunction
shortly
aHer
deployment.
The
location
class
ratings
for
geese
marked
in
summer
2002
were
poor,
and
oHen
no
messages
were
provided
during
transmission
periods.
Redesign
of
the
PTTs
for
summer
2003
resulted
in
a
significant
improvement.
Messages
with
accurate
locations
were
received
for
all
transmission
periods
(until
PTT
failure),
and
there
were
no
skipped
transmission
periods
during
2003.
Post-molt movements
There
was
no
difference
in
the
proportion
of
adult
females
that
made
major
post‑molt
We
trapped
geese
at
25
sites
in
7
counties
movements
between
2000,
55%
(n
=
26);
2001,
in
eastern
South
Dakota
during
2000
to
2003.
48%
(n
=
24);
2002,
47%
(n
=
20);
and
2003,
30%
Trapping and equipment
238
Human–Wildlife Interactions 4(2)
the
fall
freezing
period
rang‑
ed
from
2.6
to
>100
km
(Table
2).
The
longest
documented
post‑molt
movement
was
by
goose
161,
which
migrated
474
km
northward
into
North
Week
prior
to
First
week
of
Second
week
Dakota.
Twenty
geese
made
season
season
of
season
long‑distance
movements
Year
n
(%)
n
(%)
n
(%)
to
unknown
locations,
and
we
assigned
them
into
the
2000
15
of
26
(61.5)
9
of
26
(34.6)
1
of
26
(3.8)
>100‑km
distance
category.
For
analysis,
we
pooled
2001
8
of
24
(33.3)
14
of
24
(58.3)
2
of
24
(8.3)
the
directions
of
major
2002a
8
of
20
(45.0)
9
of
20
(45.0)
1
of
20
(5.0)
movements
by
marked
geese
(n
=
84)
from
2000
to
2003.
2003
6
of
14
(42.9)
4
of
14
(28.6)
4
of
14
(28.6)
Most
geese
(57%)
moved
in
a
a
northerly
direction,
while
Total
36
of
81
(44.7)b
8
of
81
(9.8)
(n
=
81) 37
of
81
(45.5)
21%
moved
in
a
southerly
direction,
and
7%
moved
a
Does
not
include
goose
102
whose
transmieer
did
not
start
func‑
in
a
westerly
direction.
We
tioning
until
September
20.
b
By
the
end
of
the
first
week
of
the
September
hunting
season,
89.3%
could
not
determine
which
of
geese
that
made
significant
movements
had
departed.
direction
the
remaining
2
14%
moved.
At
least
38%
(n
=
14;
χ 3
=
6.24,
P
=
0.10).
Our
pooled
data
revealed
that
45%
of
marked
geese
made
a
major
of
marked
geese
that
made
major
movements
post‑molt
movement
prior
to
the
beginning
returned
to
capture
areas
prior
to
the
fall
of
the
autumn
freezing
period.
Comparing
freezing
period
during
2000
to
2003.
The
return
transmieer
types,
22
of
43
(51%)
PTT‑marked
rate
may
have
been
higher
because
some
geese
geese
and
62
of
142
(42%)
VHF‑marked
geese
may
have
returned
briefly
and
gone
undetected.
made
major
movements.
There
was
a
wide
geographical
distribution
of
post‑molt
movements.
Departure
dates
for
geese
making
major
movements
did
not
differ
among
years
(χ26
=
9.22,
P
=
0.12;
Table
1).
AHer
we
pooled
departure
dates
across
years,
we
found
that
45%
(n
=
37)
of
geese
moved
during
the
last
10
days
of
August,
45%
(n
=
36)
moved
during
the
first
10
days
of
September,
and
10%
(n
=
8)
moved
during
September
11
through
20
(Figure
3).
Two
geese
moved
at
approximately
August
20,
and
1
goose
moved
during
the
third
week
of
the
hunting
season.
3. Number of marked adult, female Canada geese that made
The
maximum
distance
Figure
major post-molt movements and the movement dates in eastern South
each
goose
moved
prior
to
Dakota, 2000–2003.
Table
1.
Departure
dates
of
adult
female
Canada
geese
fieed
with
PTT
and
VHF
transmieers
in
eastern
South
Dakota,
2000–2003.
Geese
were
grouped
into
3
categories:
(1)
geese
departing
the
week
prior
to
the
start
of
the
September
season;
(2)
geese
departing
dur‑
ing
the
first
week
of
the
September
season;
and
(3)
geese
departing
the
second
week
of
the
September
season.
Goose movements • Dieter et al.
239
Table
2.
Maximum
documented
post–molt
movement
distances
from
capture
sites
for
all
VHF
and
PTT
marked
adult
female
Canada
geese
prior
to
freeze–up
from
eastern
South
Dakota,
2000–2003.
The
>100
column
are
VHF
marked
geese
that
moved
outside
the
aerial
search
areas
to
unknown
areas
representing
distances
greater
than
100
km.
during
autumn
2001,
and
the
longest
distance
movement
was
only
6
km
from
the
capture
site.
In
contrast,
7
of
8
geese
made
major
movements
from
Hamlin
County
during
2001
with
6
geese
exceeding
100
km.
Geese
from
the
same
capture
site
tended
to
make
major
movements
in
the
same
general
direction.
Maximum
documented
Sixty‑two
marked
geese
maintained
functional
distance
(km)
VHF
transmieers
and
survived
late
into
the
Year
<40
(%)
40–100
(%)
>100
(%)
second
autumn
aHer
capture,
allowing
for
comparisons
between
2
consecutive
individual
2000
21
(44)
14
(30)
12
(26)
post‑molt
movements
of
geese.
There
was
no
2001
26
(54)
6
(12)
18
(36)
difference
in
the
number
of
geese
that
made
2002
22
(52)
12
(29)
8
(19)
different
post‑molt
movement
by
year
(χ22=
2003
31
(66)
5
(12)
10
(22)
1.97,
P
=
0.37).
Nine
marked
geese
(14.5%)
made
different
post‑molt
movements
during
Total
100
(54)
36
(20)
48
(26)
their
second
autumn
of
monitoring
(Table
4).
For
example,
goose
10
moved
a
Table
3.
Radio‑marked
adult
female
Canada
geese
that
were
captured
and
banded
from
eastern
South
Dakota
that
maximum
of
3.0
km
during
autumn
made
major
movements
(>
40
km),
by
capture
site
(county)
2000,
but
flew
north
231
km
to
near
and
year,
2000–2003.
Lisbon,
North
Dakota,
in
2001,
where
it
remained
from
roughly
September
Year
3
to
October
22.
Goose
45
made
a
County
2001
2002b
2003b
Total
2000a
major
movement
(>100
km)
during
autumn
2000,
but
moved
a
distance
n
(%)
n
(%)
n
(%)
n
(%)
n
(%)
of
only
16
km
during
autumn
2001.
Brookings 9
(33) 8
(62) 8
(75) 6
(17) 31
(48)
In
addition,
25
(40%)
geese
made
a
Clark
7
(43) 8
(0)
‑
6
(33) 21
(24) molt
migration
during
the
first
spring
Codington 8
(37) 8
(25) 8
(62) 9
(22) 33
(36) aHer
capture
(Dieter
and
Anderson
Day
‑
‑
9
(44) 7
(14) 16
(31) 2009b).
Over
half
(55%)
of
marked
geese
made
differential
movements
Hamlin
8
(87) 9
(56) ‑
8
(50) 25
(64) between
years
(Table
4).
Kingsbury
8
(62)
9
(56)
9
(11)
10
(40) 36
(42)
Lake
7
(71)
8
(87)
8
(50)
‑
Total
47
(55)
50
(48)
42
(48)
16
(30) 185
(45)
23
(70)
Discussion
VHF and PTT transmitters
Past
research
on
the
effect
of
neck
collars
on
goose
survival
has
been
a
Number
of
geese
from
each
capture
site
that
made
a
sig‑
variable.
Castelli
and
Trost
(1996)
nificant
post‑molt
movement
out
of
the
total
geese
marked
found
that
neck‑collared
Canada
at
that
site.
b
Includes
both
VHF
and
PTT
transmieers.
geese
had
lower
survival
rates
than
geese
marked
with
leg
bands
only.
The
chronology
of
return
dates
across
years
was:
Schmutz
and
Morse
(2000)
reported
that
34%
(n
=
11)
prior
to
September
30;
21%
(n
=
7)
emperor
geese
(Chen
canagica)
marked
with
neck
prior
to
October15;
15%
(n
=
5)
prior
to
October
collars
with
transmieers
had
a
lower
survival
31;
22%
(n
=
7)
prior
to
November
30;
and
6%
rate
than
leg‑banded‑only
geese.
Conversely,
(n
=
2)
during
December.
Nine
geese
that
made
Samuel
et
al.
(1990)
found
that
survival
rates
major
northward
movements
were
shot
before
of
neck‑collared
adult
Canada
geese
were
not
they
were
able
to
return
to
their
capture
sites.
different
from
banded‑only
geese.
Menu
et
The
number
of
marked
geese
that
made
al.
(2000)
reported
that
neck
collars
did
not
major
post‑molt
movements
varied
by
capture
affect
survival
of
greater
snow
geese
(Chen
site
(Table
3).
For
example,
no
marked
geese
(n
caerulescens
atlantica).
Ice
accumulation
on
neck
=
8)
from
Clark
County
made
major
movements
collars
has
been
documented
to
cause
mortality
Human–Wildlife Interactions 4(2)
240
by
hunters.
Mykut
(2002)
stated
that
reconfiguration
of
the
antenna
to
prevent
excessive
preening
was
the
most
important
factor
in
improving
PTT
location
Molt
migration
class
ratings
and
longevity
%
of
functioning
transmieers.
Telonics
Inc.
(Mesa,
26.0
Ariz.)
performed
tests
with
various
configurations
of
52.0
antennas
and
transmieers
during
spring
2003
and
42.9
found
that
problems
arose
primarily
from
the
40.3
4‑hour
“on”
period,
the
antenna
configuration,
and
electronics.
The
PTTs
for
2003
resulted
in
a
significant
improvement
in
LC
ratings,
no
skipped
transmission
periods,
and
excellent
location
data.
Reconfiguration
to
a
more
vertical
position
and
further
reinforcement
of
the
antenna
resulted
in
less
damage
to
the
antenna
from
preening
geese.
However,
the
greatest
improvement
in
quality
of
locations
for
PTTs
was
probably
a
direct
function
of
increasing
the
“on”
period
to
8
hours
(D.
Beaty,
Telonics
Inc.,
personal
communication).
Table
4.
Post‑molt
movements
of
VHF–marked
adult
female
Canada
geese
from
eastern
South
Dakota
between
their
first
and
second
post‑
molt
movements
post‑capture,
2000‑03.
Marked
geese
either
made
similar
movements
the
second
autumn,
made
different
movements,
or
made
a
molt
migration
the
second
summer.
VHF
geese
marked
dur‑
ing
summer
2003
were
excluded.
Year
Similar
post‑
Different
post‑
molt
movements molt
movements
%
%
2000
(n
=
23)
56.5
17.4
2001
(n
=
25)
40.0
8.0
2002
(n
=
14)
37.5
21.4
Combined
(n
=
62)
45.2
14.5
for
geese
(MacInnes
1966,
Craven
1979,
Zicus
et
al.
1983),
but
we
found
no
evidence
of
icing
on
collars
even
though
some
of
our
marked
geese
wintered
in
South
Dakota
(Anderson
2006).
Recovery
rates
may
be
higher
on
geese
marked
with
colored
neck
collars
(Craven
1979,
Alisauskas
and
Lindberg
2002,
Sheaffer
et
al.
2004,
Alisauskas
et
al.
2006).
MacInnes
(1966)
stated
that
hunters
may
select
geese
with
colored
collars
out
of
flocks,
thus,
producing
potential
harvest
bias
of
marked
geese.
In
our
study,
the
use
of
flat
black
for
the
color
of
neck
collars
apparently
minimized
the
effect
of
neck
bands
on
hunter
selectivity.
Of
20
hunters
interviewed,
only
2
hunters
saw
the
collar
prior
to
shooting
the
bird.
We
found
it
difficult
to
locate
collared
geese
within
flocks
even
with
the
aid
of
binoculars
or
a
spoeing
scope,
even
though
we
knew
via
telemetry
that
a
marked
goose
was
present
within
the
flock.
We
suggest
that
transmieers
in
combination
with
black
neck
collars
be
used
for
future
monitoring
studies
of
Canada
geese,
as
long
as
identification
of
the
alphanumeric
code
from
a
distance
is
not
required
to
address
study
objectives
(Hestbeck
et
al.
1990).
Problems
arose
immediately
with
PTTs
that
were
aeached
to
geese
during
summer
of
2002.
The
problem
was
poor
LC
ratings
and
entire
skipped
transmission
periods
for
many
PTTs,
resulting
in
less
accurate
departure
and
movement
dates
during
2002.
Excessive
preening
by
marked
geese
was
documented,
and
several
PTTs
without
antennas
were
returned
Post-molt movements
The
extent
of
post‑molt
movements
of
Canada
geese
has
not
been
well‑documented.
While
studying
post‑molt
movements
of
Canada
geese
in
North
Dakota,
Ross
(1995)
assumed
that
any
marked
goose
that
could
not
be
located
prior
to
the
fall
freezing
period
was
dead.
However,
a
number
of
marked
geese
not
located
before
the
onset
of
the
fall
freezing
period
returned
in
subsequent
years,
which
indicates
that
these
geese
may
have
made
a
major
post‑molt
movement
(Ross
1995).
In
west‑central
Illinois,
only
2
direct
recoveries
from
8,300
young,
leg‑
banded
Canada
geese
were
recovered
north
of
Illinois
(Lawrence
et
al.
1998).
From
these
data,
Lawrence
et
al.
(1998)
concluded
that
geese
usually
do
not
make
northward
post‑molt
movements
in
west‑central
Illinois.
Schultz
et
al.
(1988)
also
did
not
report
any
evidence
that
a
northward
post‑molt
movement
had
occurred
from
resident
geese
monitored
in
southwest
Minnesota.
However,
our
data
indicate
that
geese
in
this
study
moved
to
a
much
greater
Goose movements • Dieter et al.
extent
than
indicated
by
these
previous
studies.
Prior
to
this
study,
post‑molt
movements
of
Canada
geese
in
South
Dakota
were
unknown,
and
there
was
liele
previous
evidence
to
support
a
northward
movement.
Gleason
(1997)
reported
that
only
1
direct
recovery
(a
goose
harvested
and
reported
to
the
BBL
during
the
first
hunting
season
aHer
banding)
of
16,133
Canada
geese
banded
in
eastern
South
Dakota
from
1955
to
1995
was
recovered
north
of
South
Dakota.
In
addition,
only
53
indirect
recoveries
(i.e.,
a
goose
harvested
and
reported
to
the
BBL
in
any
hunting
season
aHer
the
first
year
aHer
banding)
of
16,133
banded
geese
had
occurred
in
North
Dakota
or
Canada
(Gleason
1997).
We
found
that
almost
half
(45%)
of
marked
geese
made
major
movements
from
their
natal
areas
prior
to
the
fall
freezing
period,
many
in
excess
of
100
km.
This
percentage
is
a
minimum
value
because
some
marked
geese
were
shot
while
making
major
movements,
or
may
have
been
shot
prior
to
making
major
movements.
Almost
half
(46%)
of
major
movements
by
geese
occurred
in
late
August,
and
43%
made
major
movements
from
their
capture
wetlands
during
the
first
10
days
of
the
September
hunting
season
(Figure
3).
AHer
the
first
10
days
of
the
September
season,
only
a
few
additional
geese
made
major
movements.
We
believe
it
is
likely
that
the
start
of
the
September
season
in
eastern
South
Dakota
triggered
a
punctuated
movement
of
Canada
geese
from
their
breeding
areas.
Geese
that
moved
during
the
first
10
days
of
September
likely
moved
due
to
hunting
pressure
and
were
seeking
areas
where
they
would
be
undisturbed.
Most
geese
(57%)
that
made
significant
movements
appeared
to
have
taken
a
north‑
northwest
route,
with
multiple
geese
moving
into
North
Dakota.
VerCauteren
and
Pipas
(2004)
reported
the
post‑molt
movements
of
2
Canada
geese
from
south
central
Nebraska
to
North
Dakota,
which
appears
similar
to
movements
by
geese
in
South
Dakota.
All
marked
geese
remained
near
their
capture
wetlands
through
July
and
into
early
August,
but
they
initiated
major
movements
aHer
mid‑
August
each
year.
In
general,
geese
that
made
major
movements
from
specific
capture
sites
had
similar
movement
paeerns.
Raveling
(1978)
documented
differential
movements
and
survival
rates
for
2
flocks
banded
from
the
241
same
population
in
Manitoba.
From
our
data,
it
was
apparent
that
flocks
of
geese
marked
at
different
sites
exhibited
differential
post‑molt
movements
with
some
flocks
of
geese
being
relatively
sedentary,
while
others
exhibited
major
movements
(Anderson
and
Dieter
2009,
Dieter
and
Anderson
2009b).
We
documented
groups
of
marked
female
geese
from
the
same
capture
site
making
major
post‑molt
movements
together,
resulting
in
flocks
that
consisted
of
≥2
families.
Geese
that
moved
west
or
north
oHen
briefly
returned
to
capture
sites
later
in
autumn
prior
to
initiating
fall
migration
south.
The
effects
of
weather
on
fall
movements
of
geese
have
been
reported
(Koerner
et
al.
1974,
Zicus
1981).
Weather
has
a
direct
impact
on
when
geese
migrate
south,
but
weather
probably
did
not
initiate
the
movements
we
observed.
It
was
unlikely
that
Canada
geese
made
major
post‑molt
movements
in
search
of
feed.
Marked
geese
from
every
site
were
documented
feeding
in
small
grain
fields
within
5
km
of
their
capture
site
prior
to
any
major
movements.
In
September,
geese
began
to
feed
in
corn
silage
fields,
which
were
common
in
the
study
area.
Geese
switched
to
feeding
in
harvested
corn
fields
later
in
autumn.
The
supply
of
waste
grain
in
eastern
South
Dakota
was
in
excess
of
Canada
goose
requirements.
We
believe
that
agricultural
crops
are
not
a
limiting
factor
for
geese
in
eastern
South
Dakota
or
that
a
depletion
of
local
food
resources
caused
geese
to
move.
Influence of tradition on post-molt
movements
Hunting
pressure
influences
Canada
goose
movements
and
may
tend
to
congregate
geese
on
or
near
refuges
(Raveling
1978,
1979;
Craven
et
al.
1985;
Humburg
et
al.
1985;
Bartelt
1987).
We
believe
that
some
marked
geese
used
their
previous
experience
to
avoid
hunting
pressure
by
moving
to
counties
that
had
not
previously
been
open
to
the
September
hunting
season.
Canada
goose
tradition
can
influence
goose
movements
(Craven
et
al.
1985,
Schultz
et
al.
1988).
Schultz
et
al.
(1988)
reported
that
geese
from
southwest
Minnesota
flew
to
the
Talcot
Lake
Wildlife
Management
Area
refuge
prior
to
the
start
of
any
hunting
season.
These
breeding‑
ground
refuges
developed
goose
concentrations
because
geese
that
formed
these
paeerns
Human–Wildlife Interactions 4(2)
242
had
the
highest
survival
rates
and
returned
annually
(Schultz
et
al.
1988).
Raveling
(1978)
also
reported
similar
traditions
for
other
refuge
concentrations.
These
traditions
or
learned
behaviors
may
have
had
a
large
influence
on
post‑molt
movements
of
Canada
geese
in
this
study.
Traditions
may
help
explain
variable
movements
from
different
capture
sites.
Geese
nesting
in
a
specific
wetland
may
have
made
specific
post‑molt
movements.
Juvenile
Canada
geese
follow
their
parents
and
probably
learn
and
follow
their
post‑molt
movements.
Females
have
a
strong
aeachment
to
their
natal
areas,
and
they
return
to
that
specific
wetland
to
breed
(Sherwood
1967,
Surrendi
1970).
AHer
many
generations,
the
wetland
contains
related
females
that
in
turn
teach
their
goslings
the
same
movements
creating
a
tradition.
If
the
tradition
leads
to
a
higher
relative
survival
rate,
it
will
expand
as
the
population
grows.
Management implications
confounding
negative
impacts
of
molt‑
migrant
geese.
It
is
important
that
the
resident
component
of
Canada
goose
populations
not
be
reduced
to
levels
below
population
objectives
in
an
effort
to
decrease
goose‑related
complaints,
particularly
in
cases
where
the
segment
of
the
goose
population
responsible
for
the
damage
is
actually
molt‑migrants
and
not
resident
breeders.
Acknowledgments
Funding
for
this
research
project
was
provided
by
the
SDGFP,
South
Dakota
State
University,
and
the
Federal
Aid
to
Wildlife
Restoration
Fund
(Project
W‑75‑R,
No.
7598)
administered
by
SDFG.
All
activities
involving
handling
the
geese
were
given
approval
by
the
South
Dakota
State
University
Institutional
Animal
Care
and
Use
Commieee
(approval
no.
00‑E004).
Birds
were
banded
under
a
permit
(No.
06897)
issued
by
the
U.S.
Fish
and
Wildlife
Service
to
the
SDGFP,
and
all
banding
and
recapture
records
were
submieed
to
the
U.S.
Geological
Survey’s
Bird
Banding
Lab
in
Laurel,
Maryland.
We
thank
W.
Henderson,
U.S.
Fish
and
Wildlife
Service,
Kulm
Wetland
Management
District
for
his
assistance
in
figure
preparation.
We
acknowledge
M.
Grovijahn,
R.
Schauer,
W.
Morlock,
and
B.
Curtis
with
SDGFP
for
their
help
capturing
geese.
We
appreciate
the
efforts
of
pilots
C.
Sterud
and
J.
Fischer
for
their
safe
transportation
and
professionalism
during
countless
hours
of
aerial
surveillance.
G.
Wolbrink,
B.
Burris,
D.
Storm,
and
N.
Dieter
assisted
with
fieldwork
for
this
study.
Any
mention
of
trade
names
does
not
represent
endorsement
by
the
funding
agency
or
the
university.
Many
Canada
geese
nesting
in
eastern
South
Dakota
made
post‑molt
movements.
Most
geese
making
major
movements
followed
a
north‑
northwest
route
toward
or
into
North
Dakota.
September
hunting
seasons
are
an
important
tool
to
manage
eastern
South
Dakota’s
Canada
goose
population.
Our
data
suggest
that
the
early
September
hunting
season
in
South
Dakota
may
at
least
be
partially
responsible
for
movements
of
Canada
geese
northward
out
of
state.
Most
geese
(92%)
that
made
major
movements
leH
in
late
August
or
early
September.
We
found
that
South
Dakota’s
Canada
geese
are
not
as
resident
or
sedentary
as
previously
thought.
We
support
the
efforts
of
the
SDGFP
in
managing
their
resident
Canada
goose
population
by
aeempting
to
maximize
Literature cited
recreational
hunting
opportunities,
while
at
the
Aarvak, T., and I. J. Oien. 2003. Moult and autumn
same
time
recognizing
constraints
of
habitats
migration of non-breeding Fennoscandian
and
landowner
tolerance
to
an
increasing
lesser white-fronted geese Anser erythropus
goose
population.
An
early
September
Canada
mapped by satellite telemetry. Bird Conservagoose
season
may
simply
be
ineffective
given
tion International 13:213–226.
the
relatively
large
proportion
of
molt‑migrant
Abraham, K. F., J. O. Leafloor, and D. H. Rusch.
geese
present
during
the
season,
buffering
1999. Molt migrant Canada geese in northern
resident
breeding
geese
from
harvest.
We
Ontario and western James Bay. Journal of
suggest
that
state
and
provincial
agencies
Wildlife Management 63:649–655.
recognize
the
potential
for
subflock
behavior
Alisauskas, R. T., K. L. Drake, S. M. Slattery, and
within
resident
flocks
and
that
more
northerly
D. K. Kellett. 2006. Neckbands, harvest, and
states
and
provinces
recognize
the
potential
survival of Ross’s geese from Canada’s central
Goose movements • Dieter et al.
Arctic. Journal of Wildlife Management 70:89–
100.
Alisauskas, R. T., and M. S. Lindberg. 2002. Effects of neckbands on survival and fidelity of
white-fronted and Canada geese captured as
non-breeding adults. Journal of Applied Statistics 29:521–537.
Anderson, B. J. 2006. Movements, productivity,
and band recovery analysis of giant Canada
geese in eastern South Dakota. Thesis, South
Dakota State University, Brookings, South Dakota, USA.
Anderson, B. J., and C. D. Dieter. 2009. Long-distance molt migration by a giant Canada goose
from eastern South Dakota. Prairie Naturalist
41:126–128.
Anderson, D. R., and D. E. Joyner. 1985. Subflocking and winter movements of Canada geese in
southern Illinois. Journal of Wildlife Management 49:422–428.
Barron, D. G., J. D. Brawn, and P. J. Weatherhead. 2010. Meta-analysis of transmitter effects on avian behaviour and ecology. Methods
in Ecology and Evolution, <http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123285566/
PDFSTART>. Accessed June 28, 2010.
Bartelt, G. A. 1987. Effects of disturbance and
hunting on the behavior of Canada goose family groups in east-central Wisconsin. Journal of
Wildlife Management 51:517–522.
Batt, B. D. J., M. G. Anderson, C. D. Anderson,
and F. D. Caswell. 1989. The use of prairie potholes by North American ducks. Pages 204–
227 in A. Van der Valk, editor. Northern prairie
wetlands. Iowa State University Press, Ames,
Iowa, USA.
Blouin, F., J.-F. Giroux, J. Ferron, G. Gauthier, and
G. J. Doucet. 1999. The use of satellite telemetry to track greater snow geese. Journal of
Field Ornithology 70:1870–199.
Brewster, W. G., J. M. Gates, and L. D. Flake.
1976. Breeding waterfowl populations and their
distribution in South Dakota. Journal of Wildlife
Management 40:50–59.
Britten, M. W., P. L. Kennedy, and S. Ambrose.
1999. Performance and accuracy evaluation of
small satellite transmitters. Journal of Wildlife
Management 63:1349–1358.
Brothers, N., R. Gales, A. Hedd, and G. Robertson. 1998. Foraging movements of the shy albatross Diomedea cauta breeding in Australia:
implications for interactions with longline fisheries. Ibis 140:446–457.
243
Castelli, P. M., and R. E. Trost. 1996. Neck bands
reduce survival of Canada geese in New Jersey. Journal of Wildlife Management 60:891–
898.
Cochran, W. W., D. W. Warner, and D. G. Raveling. 1963. A radio transmitter for tracking geese
and other birds. University of Minnesota Museum of Natural History, Technical Report 1,
Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.
Coluccy, J. M., R. D. Drobney, R. M. Pace III, and
D. A. Graber. 2002. Consequences of neckband
and legband loss from giant Canada geese.
Journal of Wildlife Management 66:353–360.
Cooch, F. G. 1953. Techniques for mass capture
of flightless blue and lesser snow geese. Journal of Wildlife Management 17:460–465.
Craven, S. R. 1979. Some problems with Canada
goose neck bands. Wildlife Society Bulletin
7:268–273.
Craven, S. R., G. A. Bartelt, D. H. Rusch, and R.
E. Trost. 1985. Distribution and movement of
Canada geese in response to management
changes in east central Wisconsin, 1975–1981.
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources,
Technical Bulletin 158, Madison, Wisconsin,
USA.
Dieter, C. D., and B. J. Anderson. 2009a. Reproductive success and brood movements of giant
Canada geese in eastern South Dakota. American Midland Naturalist 162:373–381.
Dieter, C. D., and B. J. Anderson. 2009b. Molt migration by giant Canada geese in eastern South
Dakota. Human–Wildlife Conflicts 3:260–270.
Flann, C. J. 1999. Flightless giant Canada goose
depredation abatement and digestibility of selected crops in South Dakota. Thesis, South
Dakota State University, Brookings, South Dakota, USA.
Fox, A. D., C. M. Glahder, and A. J. Walsh. 2003.
Spring migration routes and timing of Greenland white-fronted geese—results from satellite telemetry. Oikos 103:415–425.
Gab, O. E. 1979. The Coteau des Prairies: an area
study. Thesis, South Dakota State University,
Brookings, South Dakota, USA.
Gabig, P. J. 2000. Large Canada geese in the
Central Flyway: management of depredation,
nuisance and human health and safety issues.
Report to the Central Flyway Council. Lincoln,
Nebraska, USA.
Gilmer, D. S., L. M. Cowardin, R. L. Duval, L. M.
Mechlin, C. W. Shaiffer, and V. B. Kuechle.
244
1981. Procedures for the use of aircraft in wildlife biotelemetry studies. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service Resource Publication 140, Washington, D.C., USA.
Glahder, C. M., T. A. Fox, C. E. Hubner, J. Madsen, and I. M. Tombre. 2006. Pre-nesting site
use of satellite transmitter tagged Svalbard
pink-footed geese Anser brachyrhynchus. Ardea 94:679–690.
Gleason, J. S. 1997. Band-recovery analysis and
survival estimates for South Dakota giant Canada goose populations. Thesis, South Dakota
State University, Brookings, South Dakota,
USA.
Gleason, J. S., J. A. Jenks, and P. W. Mammenga.
2003. Distribution and trends of banded Canada geese in South Dakota. Prairie Naturalist
35:19–31.
Groepper, S. R., P. J. Gabig, M. P. Vrtiska, J. M.
Gilsdorf, S. E. Hygnstrom, and L. A. Powell.
2008. Population and spatial dynamics of resident Canada geese in southeastern Nebraska.
Human–Wildlife Conflicts 2:271–278.
Gudmundsson, G. A., S. Benvenuti, T. Alerstam,
F. Papi, K. Lilliendahl, and S. Akesson. 1995.
Examining the limits of flight and orientation
performance: satellite tracking of brent geese
migrating across the Greenland ice cap. Proceedings of the Royal Society London 261:73–
79.
Hanson, H. C. 1959. The incubation patch of wild
geese: its recognition and significance. Arctic
12:139–150.
Hanson, H. C. 1962. Characters of age, sex, and
sexual maturity in Canada geese. Illinois Natural History Survey Biological Notes 49, Champaign, Illinois, USA.
Hanson, H. C. 1997. The giant Canada goose.
Revised edition. Southern Illinois University
Press, Carbondale, Illinois, USA.
Hestbeck, J. B., D. H. Rusch, and R. A. Malecki.
1990. Estimating population parameters for
geese from band-recovery and mark-recapture data. Transactions of the North American
Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference
55:350–373.
Higgins, K. F., D. E. Naugle, and K. J. Forman.
2002. A case study of changing land use practices in the northern Great Plains, U.S.A.: an
uncertain future for waterbird conservation.
Waterbirds 25:42–50.
Hogan, E. P., and E. H. Fouberg. 1998. The geog-
Human–Wildlife Interactions 4(2)
raphy of South Dakota. Pine Hill Press, Freeman, South Dakota, USA.
Humburg, D. D., D. A. Graber, and K. M. Babcock.
1985. Factors affecting autumn and winter distribution of Canada geese. Transactions of the
North American Wildlife and Natural Resources
Conference 50:525–539.
Hupp, J. W., J. M. Pearce, D. M., Mulcahy, and D.
A. Miller. 2006. Effects of abdominally implanted radiotransmitters with percutaneous antennas on migration, reproduction, and survival
of Canada geese. Journal of Wildlife Management 70:812–822.
Hupp, J. W., J. A. Schmutz, C. R. Ely, E. E. Syroechkovskiy, A. V. Kondratyev, W. D. Eldridge,
and E. Lappo. 2007. Moult migration of emperor geese Chen canagica between Alaska and
Russia. Journal of Avian Biology 38:462–470.
Hupp, J. W., J. A. Schmutz, and C. R. Ely. 2008.
Seasonal survival of radiomarked emperor
geese in western Alaska. Journal of Wildlife
Management 72:1584–1595.
Kennedy, D. D., and G. C. Arthur. 1974. Subflocks
in Canada geese of the Mississippi Valley population. Wildlife Society Bulletin 2:8–12.
Koerner, J. W., T. A. Bookhout, and K. E. Bednarik.
1974. Movements of Canada geese colormarked near southwestern Lake Erie. Journal
of Wildlife Management 38:275–289.
Lawrence, J. S., G. A. Perkins, D. D. Thornburg,
R. A. Williamson, and W. D. Klimstra. 1998.
Molt migration of giant Canada geese from
west-central Illinois. Pages 105–111 in D. H.
Rusch, M. D. Samuel, D. D. Humburg, and B.
D. Sullivan, editors. Biology and management
of Canada geese. Proceedings of the international Canada goose symposium, Milwaukee,
Wisconsin, USA.
Lorentsen, S.-H., I. J. Oien, and T. Aarvak. 1998.
Migration of Fennoscandian lesser white-fronted geese Anser erythropus mapped by satellite
telemetry. Biological Conservation 84:47–52.
Luukkonen, D. R., H. H. Prince, and R. C. Mykut.
2008. Movements and survival of molt migrant
Canada geese from southern Michigan. Journal of Wildlife Management 72:449–462.
MacInnes, C. D. 1966. Population behavior of
eastern Arctic Canada geese. Journal of Wildlife Management 30:536–553.
Malecki, R. A., B. D. J. Batt, and S. E. Sheaffer.
2001. Spatial and temporal distribution of Atlantic population Canada geese. Journal of
Wildlife Management 65:242–247.
Goose movements • Dieter et al.
Menu, S., J. B. Hestbeck, G. Gauthier, and A.
Reed. 2000. Effects of neck bands on survival
of greater snow geese. Journal of Wildlife Management 64:544–552.
Mykut, R. C. 2002. Evaluating satellite and conventional VHF telemetry to document molt migration of giant Canada geese (Branta canadensis
maxima) from southeastern Michigan. Thesis,
Michigan State University, Lansing, Michigan,
USA.
Mykut, R. C., H. H. Prince, and D. R. Luukkonen.
2004. Evaluating satellite and conventional
radiotelemetry to document molt migration of
giant Canada geese from southern Michigan.
Pages 203–211 in T. J. Moser, R. D. Lien, K. C.
Vercauteren, K. F. Abraham, D. E. Andersen,
J. G. Bruggink, J. M. Coluccy, D. A. Graber, J.
O. Leafloor, D. R. Luukkonen, and R. E. Trost,
editors. Proceedings of the 2003 international
Canada goose symposium, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
Naugle, D. E., R. R. Johnson, M. E. Estey, and
K. F. Higgins. 2001. A landscape approach to
conserving wetland bird habitat in the Prairie
Pothole Region of eastern South Dakota. Wetlands 21:1–17.
Powell, L. A., M. P. Vrtiska, and N. Lyman. 2004.
Survival rates and recovery distributions of
Canada geese banded in Nebraska. Pages
60–65 in T. J. Moser, R. D. Lien, K. C. VerCauteren, K. F. Abraham, D. E. Andersen, J.
G. Bruggink, J. M. Coluccy, D. A. Graber, J. O.
Leafl oor, D. R. Luukkonen, and R. E. Trost,
editors. Proceedings of the 2003 international
Canada goose symposium, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
Raveling, D. G. 1978. Dynamics of distribution of
Canada geese in winter. Transactions of the
North American Wildlife and Natural Resource
Conference 43:206–223.
Raveling, D. G. 1979. Traditional use of migration
and winter roost sites by Canada geese. Journal of Wildlife Management 43:229–235.
Ross, J. A. 1995. Behavior, habitat use, and mortality of Canada geese using hunting closure
areas in North Dakota. Thesis, Washington
State University, Pullman, Washington, USA.
Samson, F. B., F. L. Knopf, and W. R. Ostlie. 1998.
Grasslands. Pages 437–472 in M. J. Mac, P. A.
Opler, C. E. Puckett-Haecker, and P. D. Doran,
editors. Status and trends of the nation’s biological resources, Volume 2. U.S. Department
245
of the Interior, Geological Survey, Washington,
D.C., USA.
Samuel, M. D., D. H. Rusch, and S. Craven. 1990.
Influence of neck bands on recovery and survival rates of Canada geese. Journal of Wildlife
Management 54:45–54.
Schaible, D., C. D. Dieter, R. Losco, and P. Mammenga. 2005. Quantifying crop damage by
giant Canada geese in Day County, South Dakota, 2003. Proceedings of the South Dakota
Academy of Science 84:259–264.
Schmutz, J. A., and J. A. Morse. 2000. Effects of
neck collars and radiotransmitters on survival
and reproduction of emperor geese. Journal of
Wildlife Management 64:231–237.
Schultz, D. F., J. A. Cooper, and M. C. Zicus.
1988. Fall flock behavior and harvest of Canada geese. Journal of Wildlife Management
52:679–688.
Sheaffer, S. E., W. L. Kendall, and E. F. Bowers.
2005. Impact of special early harvest seasons
on subarctic-nesting and temperate-nesting
Canada geese. Journal of Wildlife Management 69:1494–1507.
Sheaffer, S. E., D. H. Rusch, D. D., Humburg, J.
S. Lawrence, G. G. Zenner, M. M. Gillespie, F.
D. Caswell, S. D. Wilds, and S. C. Yaich. 2004.
Survival, movements, and harvest of eastern prairie population Canada geese. Wildlife
Monographs 156.
Service Argos Inc. 1996. User manual. Landover,
Maryland, USA.
Sherwood, G. A. 1967. Behavior of family groups
of Canada geese. Transactions of the North
American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference 32:340–355.
Smith, G. W. 1995. A critical review of the aerial
and ground surveys of breeding waterfowl in
North America. National Biological Service, Biological Science Report 5, Washington, D.C.,
USA.
South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and
Parks. 2005. South Dakota comprehensive
wildlife conservation plan. South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks, Wildlife
Division Report 2005–2007, Pierre, South Dakota, USA.
Sterling, T., and A. Dzubin. 1967. Canada goose
molt migrations to the Northwest Territories.
Transactions of the North American Wildlife and
Natural Resources Conference 32:355–373.
Surrendi, D. C. 1970. The mortality, behavior, and
246
Human–Wildlife Interactions 4(2)
homing of transplanted juvenile Canada geese.
da geese. Page 253 in T. J. Moser, R. D. Lien,
Journal of Wildlife Management 34:719–733.
K. C. VerCauteren, K. F. Abraham, D. E. AnU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2009. Waterfowl
dersen, J. G. Bruggink, J. M. Coluccy, D. A.
population status, 2009. U.S. Department of
Graber, J. O. Leafloor, D. R. Luukkonen, and
the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, WashR. E. Trost, editors. Proceedings of the 2003
ington, D.C., USA.
international Canada goose symposium, MadiVaa, S., P. Mammenga, M. Grovijahn, J. Kanta, A.
son, Wisconsin, USA.
Lindbloom, R. Schauer, S. Lindgren, K. Fisk, Zicus, M. C. 1981. Flock behavior and vulnerabilT. Kirschenmann, C. Switzer, and C. Huxoll.
ity to hunting of Canada geese nesting at Crex
2010. South Dakota resident Canada goose
Meadows, Wisconsin. Journal of Wildlife Manmanagement plan. South Dakota Department
agement 45:830–841.
of Game, Fish and Parks, Pierre, South, Da- Zicus, M. C., D. F. Schultz, and J. A. Cooper. 1983.
kota, USA.
Canada goose mortality from neckband icing.
VerCauteren, K. C., and M. J. Pipas. 2004. PostWildlife Society Bulletin 11:286–290.
molt movement to the north observed in Cana-
CHARLES D. DIETER is a professor in the
Department of Biology and Microbiology at South
Dakota State University. He received an M.S.
degree in wildlife and fisheries science and a Ph.D
degree in biological sciences from South Dakota
State University (SDSU). His research includes work
on waterfowl, upland birds, waterbirds, songbirds,
beavers, otters, jackrabbits, flying squirrels, and
herps. He is a certified wildlife biologist and teaches
mammalogy, vertebrate zoology, animal behavior,
animal diversity, and environmental toxicology at
SDSU.
BOBBY J. ANDERSON
is an assistant professor of wildlife and fisheries sciences at Valley City
State University. He obtained his B.S. degree in
wildlife and fisheries science and his Ph.D. in biological sciences from South Dakota State University.
He has been a member of The Wildlife Society since
1998. His research interests include waterfowl ecology and management, mammal ecology, and avian
interactions with wind energy developments.
JEFFREY S. GLEASON received his B.S.
degree in wildlife and fisheries sciences from South
Dakota State University (SDSU). He received his
M.S. degree from SDSU, where he studied band-recovery analysis and survival of giant Canada geese
in South Dakota. He received his Ph.D. degree from
the University of Western Ontario, where he studied
effects of increasing lesser snow goose population
on reproductive ecology and behavior of Southern
James Bay Canada geese on Akimiski Island, Nunavut. He has worked as a wildlife biologist for both
the Minerals Management Service in Anchorage,
Alaska, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division
of Migratory Bird Management, in Portland, Oregon
and is currently employed as a wildlife biologist with
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 6- Division of Refuges, Kulm Wetland Management District
in Kulm, North Dakota.
PAUL W. MAMMENGA is a waterfowl biologist with the South Dakota Department of Game,
Fish and Parks, where has has been employed
since 1978. A major part of his job for 20 years was
with a giant Canada goose restoration program in
South Dakota.
SPENCER VAA has worked for the South
Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks for
almost 40 years. He is currently the senior waterfowl
biologist for the state of South Dakota.